tv Hardball With Chris Matthews MSNBC October 26, 2010 3:00am-4:00am EDT
does make sense but in the modern world it doesn't and so our brains are kind of tricked into thinking we should go for the simple black and white world view and it takes an additional cognitive step to step out of that and say, wait a minute. maybe we should use reason and critical thinking. >> michael shermer the founding publisher of "skeptics" magazine my apology for the brevity. it is from an over written introduction. great thanks for your time tonight. >> you're welcome. >> i'm keith olbermann. that's october 25th. good night and good luck. eight days to go. let's play "hardball." leading off tonight, nerves on edge. how can people be so heartless.
the american independent voter's on a tear. a new battleground state poll shows independent voters inclined to be nastier to the democrats next tuesday. whether the democrats can stop the surge among independents will determine whethish they cut their losses next tuesday or dploun a republican tsunami. we'll weigh all of the odds on that. look at the hot senate races and tell you which party is benefits from early voting. and also i'm talk to former president jimmy carter about the race to the finish this week. and what would happen if president obama gets caught between a republican candidate and independent in 2012. what does happen if sarah palin runs and sparks an independent run by mike bloomberg of new york? believe it or not, they could split the vote and result in palin's election in the house of representatives. also closing arguments. we'll take a look at the last rush of the ads hitting us on the airwaves. and what they tell us about which confident is going to win and which knows he or she is in trouble. and which candidate said president obama can take his
endorsement and these are his words up in rhode island, shove it. only after he asked for the president's endorsement and didn't get it. that's in the "sideshow" where it belongs. all of that's ahead. first let's check the polls around the country. left, let's go to the "hardball" let's start with a generic congressional ballot. look at that number that is nasty. 44-30, independent voters are going to go for the republicans. that's in the politico/george washington battleground state. now to the pennsylvania senate race where we were last thursday. the latest muhlenberg/morning call out of allentown tracking poll has republican pat toomey the club for growth with the five-point lead over joe sestak. 47-42. that race may be opening. you for toomey. in illinois where we were on wednesday last week republican mark kirk has a three-point lead over democrat alexi gian oulous. too close to call there. in the florida senate race, it's marco rubio holding the big lead over charlie crist is fading and kendrick meek who is not taking off.
looks like rubio down there. in california, a new "los angeles times" poll has senator barbara boxer, who was struggling, up eight now. something happened up there. and check out this number from the california governor's race. look at this. jerry brown, the old veteran, coming in 13 points over meg whitman. we're going to continue to check the "hardball" scoreboard all this week of all of the big races leading up to november 2nd next tuss day. now, the state of play. we've got experts here. cynthia tucker political columnist for "the atlanta-journal constitution." and ron brownstein. you were in california this weekend. my wife's stanford reunion. what's going on with jerry brown? was it the way meg whitman seemed to have treated her latina housekeeper? is that it?
is it personal? >> i think that it is largely personal in that meg whitman has made herself through a variety of reasons the focal point of the campaign. more than jerry brown. i mean it is more -- >> and that's not good. >> that's not good in a time when people -- so to dissatisfy and that's why the other race is closer. the general feeling in california is that the governor's race is more of a referendum whitman. the senate race is more of a referendum on boxer and nobody wants to be the focus at a time when you have such broad dissatisfaction with the way that things are going. >> i think in california they're voting against my friend, arnold schwarzenegger. i think that jerry brown ad, that shows her lip-syncing basically, or you know synchronized swimming with arnold schwarzenegger on every single word she spoke, is lethal to her. because it looks like she's another republican business person who says they can fix up sacramento when it's already been screwed by a republican businessman. >> well, that was a very clever ad, for jerry brown to run, because i think that he had more trouble digging himself out of the hole i thought he was in
when one of his staffers was overheard calling meg whitman something that you should never call a woman. >> right we agree on that. >> but he came right out of that with this hard-hitting ad. meg whitman's $130 million that she's spent hasn't done her any good. but in an even odder contest, barbara both, seems to be pulling away from carly fiorina and i thought that that would be harder for boxer to pull off. >> you were making up a point. why is barbara boxer who's been around for a while, either like her or you don't. i've always liked her but some people don't, she's too ideological for people. what's brought her back out of the woods where she's up to 50? >> the "l.a. times" poll is better for brown and boxer? it's a little wider. public policies in california last week were plus eight for brown. this is plus 13. plus five for boxer. there are a number of other -- i think people do feel that boxer is ahead, but democrats do not feel that race is done. but they feel they have a strong advantage there because i think that brown's really emerged as kind an eccentric almost ingratiating character as opposed to boxer.
because i think brown has reemerged as the character as opposed to whitman. boxer's challenge is at the backdrop of her race, is dissatisfaction with what's going on in washington. so a very different context in which these are being fought out. >> the latino vote, neither one of them, neither republican is doing well. >> they're not. >> when you fire somebody after something that you knew that they were doing illegally all those years and pretend that you're cleaner than whatever. let me ask you about jerry brown i love this guy for one reason. he makes all guys who are getting older feel much better. because he's 70. he was governor back in the '70s. >> he replaced ronald reagan. he succeeded ronald reagan. >> i am fascinated by the fact he looks like he's come alive. he's got the juice.
>> he clearly enjoys politics. he enjoys running. he enjoys the contest. >> let's look at pennsylvania. we were there last week. this is the muhlenberg tracking poll out of -- as i said out of allentown. it's got toomey moving ahead. he's a bit to the right of normal pennsylvania voters. has he just done something right or is it anti-washington, anti-bush. >> no in a different year it would be much more difficult for him to win. move reliably republican toward leading strongly democrat. obama won by 200,000 votes in '08. the size and scale of issues. toomey can compete in a way he might not be able to otherwise. >> taxes is an issue. we saw murkowski years ago. here's toomey saying today he doesn't see a connection between himself and other candidates like christine. of course he doesn't! let's listen. who would want to be connected to her? the witch. let's take a look. >> i really don't see the need to do this. you know, this is a sort of
fictitious connection that joe sestak is trying to encourage. frankly, i don't think anybody is confusing the candidates. i've been campaigning for 18 months now. i've had a very clear message during that entire time. i don't see the issue. >> so, ron, here's a guy, we're wearing ties because we have to. on this show. you show little underwear shirt, you look like a regular guys these days. an you say, i got nothing to do with the person running in the next state. i don't know her. >> there's enormous overlap from virtually after the serious republican contenders. we did a piece on that. you can look down the board on these issues. they're very similar. but in terms of credentials and credibility and personal gravitas you're talking about something different with pat toomey than sharron angle and christine o'donnell. >> a lot of people up in philly are watching these ads. >> exactly and that has helped sestak a little bit. they're actually -- >> she's got great name i.d. by the way, christine o'donnell. >> well -- >> everybody knows who she is.
>> because we talk about her all of the time. she's so outrageous, it's hard not to talk about her. and as you know in certain parts of pennsylvania, people see the delaware commercials. and so -- >> they're called philadelphia commercials. i hate to tell you. philadelphia television is so dominant, it covers all of south jersey, five counties and the entire state of delaware. >> you know, chris --. >> that's why it's so expensive to run for office. >> look at pennsylvania and california. there's a lot of similarity in the way big voter groups are divided in each state. what matters is how many are there in each state. in california, barbara boxer and jerry brown are getting walloped by white-collar voters. you mentioned latinos. 1/three the vote in california is going to be non-white. >> and they will show. >> that will be even down and the white voters more of them will be college educated, white-collar voters where these democrats are doing better. in pennsylvania not quite as many to work with and arkansas, north dakota, are there none of
them. >> 1982, bill bradley, bradley was supposed to win the governorship out in that state and all of a sudden this -- came back. in illinois a new chicago tribune poll has republican mark kirk up three points over the gialexi giannoulias. i thought that he was a very attractive candidate, giannoulias when you met him. he's the coolest customer. he worked crowd. didn't come in to do just the speech, interview with me. he met everyone. stayed for 45 minutes. likable in person. >> but he's got some major baggage. he carries some major ethical -- he's got ethical issues. banking issues. the one thing you don't want to be in this particular cycle is a candidate who has you know run a bank that failed. whose family's made a bank that's made bad bank loans. >> i hate the word "lying" not telling the truth about his war record military record? >> that's probably why the race is as close as it. >> you know -- >> are there any great candidates this year that
just -- imperfect candidate against another imperfect candidate? i can't find the stars. >> you could be george washington and you come out of this with a lot of stars. but sestak, kirk, murray, bennet in colorado, and even boxer in california, they're all face the same mathematical equation. they're going to get walloped among their states. and the issue, going to hold down their losses in the suburbs and get out enough minorities to get over the top. similar in all those races. >> reporting this week. first thing -- >> yeah. >> big swing toward the republicans among independents 44-30. the second thing is you interviewed the president. >> yes. >> what was it that hasn't been picked up in your interview with him? i want to talk about attitude as we say in philly. >> sorry about philly, by the way. >> i know. >> yeah. >> tell me i was in san francisco watching the damn thing. >> has his attitude changed. >> you got me caught off. >> i'm sorry, i'm are. >> i caper a lot about the phillies. is it a problem for him that he's seen too elite, too holier than now in a sense of being
above politics? does he have to get down a little bit in the real world the next time around to get re-elected? does he know that. >> there's no question among kind of working class voters the democrats are going to get plastered and they perform more poorly in this election than they did in '94. but when i talked to the president last week -- >> does he share their sweat and worry about life? >> well, it's an interesting question. i mean he does not sweating -- he does not seem to be -- you know i interviewed bill clinton the sunday before the '94 election and you could femthe waste of it on him and trying to wrestle with how he got himself into this position. talking to president obama it's clear that he's begun to think systematically of how he'll do with the world with a lot of more republicans in it. but you i didn't hear a lot second-guessing. more of matter of fact of how i'm going to move forward. >> the average guy, if you will. black, white, whatever. does he feel a little humbled by his failure to get the unemployment rate down to the 8%, his economists said he will. >> of course he does. i mean, there is absolutely no doubt that the economy weighs heavily on the president's wife. for heaven's sakes, let's remember his own childhood. the president didn't grow up
privileged. he grew up of a child of -- >> does he remember? >> well of course he does. he grew up as a child of a single mother- er mother. his grandparents were second class. but bill clinton loss tyut. bill clinton may have projected that better. >> right. >> but democrats lost 52 seats when the unemployment rate was under 6%. so if the democrats can now hold their losses to -- in the relationship in the 50s. >> to end the '50s. >> in the '50s. >> the way i authority by a expert. only lose 50 seats in the house to year, it's a good night. >> that's a bad/good night. >> lost 52 seats in 1994. >> look i do think it'll be somewhere in that range if not slightly higher. any -- as i've said to you anyplace democrats will have do win a lot of working class voters they're in danger, whether the house or the senate, because those voters are skeptical of government. dubious of obama to begin with and hammered by the economy. >> i've got my predictions at the end of the show. i'll tease until the end the show but along those lines and i think it's going to be very tough for them to beat this win but i still think that you've got to vote and if anybody up there doesn't vote because they
think a bad year for their party >> i've got my predictions at the end of the show. i'll tease until the end the show but along those lines and i think it's going to be very tough for them to beat this win but i still think that you've got to vote and if anybody up there doesn't vote because they think a bad year for their party they're making a mistake, because always going to be good candidates that you should vote for and bad ones that you've got to keep out of office no matter what the tidal flow which is kind of dirty sometimes. anyway, thank you, cynthia. thank you, ron brownstein. coming up, former president jimmy carter will join us. we'll get his take on the 2010 midterms and what hinges that president obama needs to be doing. you're watching "hardball" only on msnbc. [ female announcer ] expensive specialty products? why go there when there's olay regenerist? [ male announcer ] microsculpting cream hydrates better than some creams costing $500. [ female announcer ] and not only that, [ male announcer ] 80% of women find olay to be a luxurious experience. [ female announcer ] olay. challenge what's possible. let's raise a glass to cookies just out of the oven. to the morning bowl of cereal.
and to lactaid® milk. easy to digest and with all the calcium and vitamin d of regular milk. [ female announcer ] lactaid®. the original lactose-free milk. well, here's a troubling sign for democrats. president obama's been campaigning heavily in places he won big in 2008. take a look at the counties where he's been mostly campaigning. multnomah county. king county, wash way, that's seattle where he carried 70% of the vote. los angeles county, which he won
by 69% of the vote. and of course, san francisco, which he carried with 4%. clark county, nevada, which of course is las vegas, where he won 59%. and hennepin county, minnesota. that's minneapolis. carried that with 63% and that's where he's spending all of his time. today in providence, rhode island, he won that county with 83% of the vote. the places that the president's carried an average of 72% of the vote last time and here he is working hard.
welcome back to "hardball." president jimmy carter kept a diary during his time in the white house. his new book is aptly titled "white house diary," president carter, thank you so much for coming on "hardball." i often mention the fact that i had the honor to serve you and i don't want to leave that fact out as we begin this hard-hitting interview. let me ask you, did you make any changes in your diary to be nicer? did you take anything out that
was tough -- too tough for even -- and even you to speak? >> no, as a matter of fact, chris, after about a year i was going to make the entire diary available to scholars and news reporters, including you, if you'd like. even with all of the typo graphical errors, so no, i did not delete anything just to save my feelings or to ease off on it. i just picked out, about 20% of the most interesting, enticing, tintalating and historically important entries that i made. >> what was interesting i thought from my own personal view, from my own keyhole into your administration, that the only mention that you made of the speechwriters was to say you didn't like the draft of the farewell address. >> well, i had a good relationship with some of the speech writers. >> yeah. >> and as you know not a good relationship with others but i like to write most of my own
speeches but i benefited greatly from some the other speechwriters' input. >> you took a lot of grief from people, wise guys who made fun of you for mentioning that your daughter, amy, had mentioned nuclear nonproliferation as a concern. and here it is something that we almost talk about all of the time, the possibilities like countries like iran, will get control of nuclear weapons. do you feel a little bit angry about the fact that people mocked you for something that's so current today even in your lifetime has been proven correct. >> well not angry, not 30 years later. as a matter of fact i just got back from north korea, where i was trying to do away with the north korea's inclination to build nuclear weapons, so not angry but i didn't have a very good relationship with the president in many ways. >> let me ask you about the energy thing. you were made of for trying to get people to wear sweaters in the winter. reduce the thermostat. you're laughing but it was such a hot is. >> you it was. >> people were saying that you were making the presidency small when in fact you were dealing with issue that we're dealing with today, which is energy consumption. >> i wrestled with it for four
years, when i went into office we were importing 8.6 million barrels for day. we could have cut it down to half of that. and now back up to 11 million barrels a day and most of the energy policies that i've put into effect it wasn't embedded in law have been reversed because of pressure from the oil companies, the automobile companies, and presidents afterwards who didn't care anything about the energy policy, particularly ronald reagan. >> yeah, let me ask you about this issue that's cutting right now. a lot of buzz on this show already about the possibility of a third party running in 2012, which in many ways, as you know, oommatically tends to help the republicans, in this case, and maybe not automatically but bloomberg the mayor of new york runs, that's going to hurt obama, isn't it? what do you think of third parents. >> well of course i didn't like it when i ran for re-election in 1980 because for 2 1/2 years, ted kennedy had been running against me and in the last minute, a third party candidate came in and picked up a lot of liberal democratic votes. >> right.
>> and as a matter of fact, ronald reagan only got less than 51% of the votes but he won because of a third party candidate. >> won't bloomberg do the same to obama? if you look at the states that bloomberg could win. new york, connecticut, new jersey, you know the ones, maybe florida. they're all obama states last time. he would only hurt obama. he wouldn't hurt a palin or any kind of republican at all. >> well, i'm not sure that bloomberg is seriously considering that. i think it would be a mistake if he did because he couldn't win but he might prevent obama from winning re-election and what he dold is just guarantee the republican would move in the white house. and that's what happened in 1980 when ronald reagan moved in because of the split democratic party. >> so you think it would be bad for the country? >> i think it would be better for the country if president obama was re-elected. >> let me ask you about the democratic liberals. you mentioned them. they tend to be dissatisfied often. there's a great old phrase, ndc the new democratic coalition years ago and it also means, november doesn't count. it's the attitude of as long as you win the fight on the left,
it beat the center -- or beat the center left, you've won the battle even if the right ends up winning. you had the battle with ted kennedy, i see it today with the net roots the younger generation, groups that are angry off. time at this president. what do you make of it? >> well, i think there's no doubt in my mind that in history, this is the most polarized country and the most polarized partisan divide that we've ever seen. in the last two years or year and a half now, or more. the republicans have decided, we won't give obama any support, maybe two or three votes at the most on the most important issues, even when he puts forward ideas that the republicans have first originated themselves. so it's a deadlock now. and i hope that after this election is over, the republicans will feel some responsibility whereas they've been completely irresponsible the last two years. >> but the republicans, you're right, they basically blocked everything the president tried to do and forced him to the left. forced him to build left wing or center left coalitions without any help from the center right. didn't they win -- i mean it's
brutal politics, but they won, i guessing on the argument because they made him look lefty. >> well, that's true. and i was forcing the other direction as you know, because ted kennedy took away the very liberal wing of the right democratic party and i got extraordinary good support from the republicans while i was in office and we had a very high batting average, as you know. >> yeah. well, what do you make of this? what is there, just something fundamentally wrong with the democratic coalition? if if you're a centrist democrat like you, like a moderate -- you're a progressive to some extent but basically a moderate. is the left always going to be a thorn in the side of a center left or a moderate democratic president? >> well, i think the attrition radio's been even greater among the moderate republicans. and now the hard right, very conservative fundamentalists republicans are taking over. and any moderate republican is
very likely to be on their way out of the house or senate. so i think that's what's happening. and the reason is that we've had such a tremendous infusion of enormous sums of money into the campaign chest of the candidates for congress or senate and presidency and so now we are inundated with negative advertising that kind of takes over and it polarizes everything because the best avenue to success is to destroy the character and reputation of yourow. the and that animosity or distrust carries over into washington, and also generates very hardlined blue and red states in the country. >> well, what do you think of these tea party people? mr. president, i look at a lot of them as, they're not all crazies. they're regular people. a lot of middle, middle-class people. they're great religious, church-going people like yourself. and i'm wondering do they know that they're being backed by big corporations and all of this conservative money at top. >> the ones who know it deny it and obviously the tea party movement has been completely de -- by hard right oligarchs who want to prevent the old companies and major corporation from having to pay their share of taxes. or to comply within
environmental laws. and so the tea party movement has been suborned by these very right-wing people who don't get a darn about low-class working people but just want to further their own nest. >> i wish they knew that. let me ask you this, do you think for sure that barack obama, the president, has made up his mind to run for re-election? last question. >> no, i don't know. i don't have any relationship with barack obama in talking about his future plans. my hope is that he will prevail. and i believe that the next two years might be even better for him because he'll have at least one body in the congress of the united states that has to have some responsibility to the public. that is, be the house of representatives. but with that responsibility will be quite a change in the total irresponsible action that the republicans have assumed the first two years. but i think it will let obama go directly to the people more. and to plan his -- his staff -- his flag among the people, like harry truman did in 1948, when he won the presidency
re-election because he characterized the congress as the do nothing congress. i think that obama has that chance now, can he didn't have before, with the democratic majority in both houses. >> well, lots me pay tribute to your diary, mr. president. it's clear from even reading a bit of it. that you had no help from speechwriters. no one got in your way. this was pure jimmy carter, and anybody who wants to know what you really think all they have to do is read this book "the white house diary of jimmy carter," thank you, mr. president, it was an honor to serve you and it was an honor to have you on tonight. thanks for having you on. >> best wishes to you, chris. up next why is the democrat running for governor, told president obama and these are his words, not mine, to shove it? that's up in roady, rhode island. the "sideshow's" straight ahead.
back to "hardball." now to the "sideshow," first hell have no furry. frank capio the democrat running for rhode island governor said through his campaign last week that he would welcome president obama's endorsement. well, yesterday ahead of the president's visit up there the white house announced he would not be endorsing a candidate in that race. capio to put it lightly didn't take the news well. >> but i never asked for president obama's endorsement. you know, he could take his endorsement and really shove it, as far as i'm concerned. one of the worst floods in the history of the united states a few months back and president obama didn't even do a flyover of rhode island like president bush did when new orleans had their problems. he ignored us. and now he's coming into rhode island treating us like an atm machine. so what i'm saying to president obama very clearly is i'll wear as a badge of honor and as a badge of dhurj he doesn't want
to endorse me as a democrat. >> wow. remember that race does include independent candidate lincoln chaffey who served in the senate with the president as a moderate republican and was early to endorse obama's presidential bid. chaffey's pulled ahead of that race for next tuesday. i guess the president los angeles a memory. >> next you could add carl paladino to the race. inflating their military service. paladino's campaign manager has stated that paladino served six months of active duty at ft. bliss and commanded 250 soldiers training for vietnam. well, statements later accurate in "the new york times" profile. well "the new york post" decided to look into paladino's military record. its report, paladino served half of that amount time, just three months of active duty and never trained anybody. paladino another blow this weekend when his hometown paper "the buffalo news" endorsed andrew cuomo. their reasoning, paladino doesn't have the temperamental balance i love that word balance to serve as governor. in other words he's unbalanced.
now to the big number, meg whitman of california, rick scott of florida, and linda mcmahon of connecticut have all these big personal money made in business to fund their candidacies. all in all, how much have they all spent together? wow. $243 million bucks the three of them spent. rick scott, whitman and mcmahon a quarter billion into their campaigns. tonight's money can't buy you love big number. up next the energy of the tea party may help vault sarah palin to the republican nomination in 2012. who knows? and one keen observer says she may not be able to beat president obama on a one on one but may be able to bring someone like mike bloomberg as a third party candidate as a third alternative. that's ahead. i am rachel. i was given a bounce dryer bar and asked to try it out and then answer a few questions. the biggest thing was that it's effortless. you stick it and forget it. by not putting in the dryer sheet, it's one less thing that i have to do. it's one less thing that i have to do. we helped keep your skin clear.
looks like we're in for a bumpy ride. go ahead, ignore me. but in this turbulent market, you're going to need help... protecting some of your assets for retirement. an axa equitable annuity could give you... guaranteed income for life. i'd call them, but what do i know? i'm just the 800-pound gorilla in the room. don't worry. i'm here. want guaranteed income for life? axa equitable is redefining what you expect from annuities. ooh, peanuts. you go next if you had a
back to "hardball." in an upcoming "new york kwgs magazine recover. reports that sarah palin presidential run no longer just a possibility. it's a problemability. quote, among two dozen senior strategists and operatives with whom i've spoken in recent days there is a growing consensus that palin is running or setting herself up to run. all agreed that her entry would radically and fundamentally transform the race. most averred.
more than one argued that she's already the de facto front-runner. joining us right now is the writer himself "new york" magazine's john heilemann. and also joining us "the daily beast." shoshana walsh. john, i think that you're making a lot of noise with this piece. and basically you sit up this rubgoldberg solution. if sarah palin runs and it looks like she's heading towards the nomination and then mike bloomberg jumps from to grab all those suburban moderate republican votes and tries to win down the middle. >> yeah i think it's a three-part thing and each of it -- putting it all together it might seem implausible. as the piece of the article that you just read, chris, i think a lot of people now in the republican party who are professional in the beginning of politics professionally think that she's going to run. that's the first part. the second part is, could she win the republican nomination? well she's -- the thing that you read there about her being the de facto front-runner she's going to be if the republican
nomination fight looks on two-bracket fight between an antiestablishment bracket and an establishment bracket she's pretty much guaranteed to be the finalist on the antiestablishment side with the energy of the tea party she might get the nomination and the thing that mike bloomberg looked for in 2008 and is going to look for again in 2012 is what the people around him call wide goal post. if she's the nominee not guaranteed but likely he'll get in and then we're kind of in unchartered territory. >> why would he run. >> jimmy carter is saying tonight on our show that he can't win. if he can't win with 270 electoral votes why would he run. >> a think a couple of different possibilities there. one he thinks that he has a more optimistic sense of his ability to draw from both the democratics' side and the republicans' side than some analysts do. he might come to the conclusion, looking it that are there some red states where he could take enough from palin to actually win those states. and the second possibility, i suppose, if nobody gets an electoral college majority and it goes to the house that bloomberg would think that the republicans in the house would
be reasonable enough to put him in charge, rather than put sarah palin in charge. >> yeah but he's not looking at the -- i want to go to shoshana on this. here's the problem. the problem is if neither candidate for the presidency or none of the three, in this case, bloomberg, the president, or in that case that scenario sarah palin, all three run, it's palin, bloomberg, obama, if none of them gets 270 electoral votes the house of representatives doesn't decide it. members of the house of representatives get to vote, state by state, with each state getting one vote. now the way this country's divided electorally the republicans generally have over 25 states because that's the way that the small states enter into they're all republican. so if it does go to the house it would go to a republican and it would be run by conservative republican states who wouldn't like bloomberg. there is a chance here that palin could be elected president by a conservative majority among states each getting one vote in the house. it is possible. >> and it's really interesting and that's what john pointed now
the his article. i think that even without the bloomberg edwhagz she could win. i think that it would be difficult. i think that her -- leaving the governorship is really her achilles' heel but you're right if it goes to the house of representatives and many of her mama and papa grizzlies win next tuesday and i don't think that she's backing and she's thinking that it will -- that she's planned it out as in john's article but i think that she probably read it today and said, hey, it's pretty good -- it's great that i back said all of these people. i mean, obviously not all of them will win next tuesday but it's only going to help her if in scenario that john describes does know. >> that's the whole question. you're making a pretty easy argument to make. i've never thought about it before, john. it's not at all hard to imagine that bloomberg steals some these democratic states, a handful of them. denies to get to 270, probably, probably. and basically look at that map. there it is. heilemann brings up an intriguing scenario. the bloomberg candidates. here's what could happen with the electoral map.
quote, bloomberg especially with the help of his billions could stand a reasonable chance of carrying new york, new jersey, connecticut, florida, and california. combine that way strong enough showing in a few other states in the industrial northeast, you could deny obama those states. and with palin holding the fire-engine red states of the south, the president might find himself short of the 270 electoral votes. assuming that you can remember the basics of american government 101. you'll now know it's up to the house of representatives, where you get each state getting one vote. and that is the thing though. the weird thing about this is, we haven't had the house of representatives pick a president since, what way back in the 19th century. what do we make of this? john, your thoughts. >> as i say, look on some level it's kind of a crazy scenario. but if as i said if you take it apart you can kind of find yourself getting there and i do want to stress, bloomberg in this circumstance, he's looking for a scenario, not just for palin were the republican nominee but looking for a situation where obama was considerably weaker than he is
today, if obama has a 45% or 44% approval rating in 2012, bloom berpg's not going to see that as a path. but if obama's down in the high 30s which if the faef economy continues to be stagnant or if it the gets worse, could be the case, bloomberg would i think try to make the argument north just in those states that you mentioned but in some of the paler red states that he's the only one who has the economic competence to get the country out of the economic morass. >> well, here's the bad part of your story. if he runs, and all that he does it take away votes from barack obama and he delivers this to the republican party in the way it would work is, if you have two candidates knocking the incumbent, him and the republican candidate whacking away at obama for two years, he would bring down obama and turn it over to the republicans. and i'm not sure, is that what mike bloomberg wants to do, john heilemann? >> i don't think that's what he wants on to do, but again -- >> it's what john anderson did to carter. >> i think that he would only run if he saw away -- if he saw away to winning it for himself. i think that's the case. it's always been his main
standard of decision. >> he thinks if he could win he should run. if he can't win he shouldn't run. that's what i think, my judgment. i shouldn't be giving editorials earlier in the show. last naught thought. >> i agree. and the way that john described it in his article, if bloomberg thought that he couldn't win he couldn't get into it and john also said this in his article, that it isn't that far fetched. in 2008 they flirted the idea also that you know, bloomberg definitely exflorid. so it's not that crazy that he would explore it again, and if does she have two people and as john said, the goal posts are pretty wide between a palin and an obama i can definitely see him getting in but i agree, wouldn't get in if he thinks that he couldn't win and he has a lot of money, too, to back himself up. >> great, you know, agree with you, john, it's a great piece. i've never seen two political parents less popular. >> yes. >> and even if the republicans sweep next tuesday it's not because anybody like him. thanks, john heilemann, congratulations on a great new piece. shashana thanks for joining us from "the daily beast." the latest political ads coming up, always fun to watch. the closer ads. they're fascinating because you can tell by watching them, who's
well, here's president obama's closing argument against the republicans. he made it late today in rhode island. let's listen. >> they voted against these ideas, again and again. they talk a good game about tax cuts and giving entrepreneurs the freedom to succeed, when, in fact, they also ended up voting
often using ads what do they tell us well they tell us a lot about the state. msnbc political analyst. and "the new york times" sam tanenhaus joins us. the author of "the death of conservatism conservatism" now out in paperback. go to this first ad, and meg whitman's she's obviously been rocked a bit with n these poll numbers. double digit behind jerry brown. choice between a long-time politician with no plan for the future and a billionaire with no government experience. let me tell you my story. my husband and i came here as newlyweds. we raised our family here and the california dream came true for me in ways i could never have imagined. now i'm running for governor to restore the california dream for everyone. i'm not a career politician or a hollywood star. i'm from silicon valley where i created thousands of jobs at ebay. >> after months of kicking the opponent as hard as she can she
goes sweet and lovely, peaches and cream. will that work? sam, will people buy the sweetness after all the rough play of the last couple months? >> what surprises me, chris, is this is the ad at the end of her campaign? she spent $140 million or something and now she is introducing herself and her biography? looks a little desperate to me. also, you know, this question of business versus government. you know, that's kind of the big issue on the table now. you have a populist electorate not so happy with either one and she is putting herself in one camp. i don't know about this one. >> i agree. here is harry reid. the senate majority leader out in nevada. >> sharron angle is reckless, radical, and extreme. >> electing sharron angle would cost thousands of jobs. >> she will be the knock out punch for nevada's economy. >> sharron angle supports tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas. that's just crazy. >> there is a better choice. harry reid is saving thousands
of jobs. >> let's start with the fact that i'm a republican. there is nobody that's done more for the state. >> we need the majority leader. >> replacing senator reid with sharron angle would be a disaster. >> well, there you've got the establishment argument. is that going to work in 2010? >> that's how you do an attack ad. keeping the ad, get your business leaders, your casino owners, the people who even said he is a republican to make the ad. >> don't believe me. believe them. >> and it's so establishment. >> you know something? if you're worried about jobs and you're trying to -- >> let's take a look at this one. talk about an easy one. here is a chippy from chris coons' ad against his forlorn opponent christine o'donnell. this isn't even fair at this point. >> christine o'donnell says a lot of strange things. >> i'm not a witch. evolution is a myth. companies are cross breeding humans and animals and coming up
with mice with fully functioning human brains. >> huh? now she's attacking chris coons. the truth is, he cut $130 million taxes in new castle county are among the lowest in the region. unlike washington chris coons balanced six budgets. >> is it okay to call zany zany, sam? i mean, this is piling on. unnecessary roughness in a football game? >> that's a really clever ad, chris. it starts off with all of the crazy stuff, boils it down. does not mess with the whole separation of church and state issue, which is actually hard to parce, you know, literally in the constitution. and then also pivots to just what coons has done. so it kind of reminds the voter there is a reason you have to vote. here is a guy who's ahead. his concern probably is complacency. will people go to the polls? he just gives them enough of christine o'donnell so they've got a reason to go out there and vote. really clever ad.
>> rod serlg making a comeback. linda mcmahon the wrestling queen going after her opponent, dick blumenthal. here's part of it. >> people have said a lot of false things about me. i knew it would happen but i wanted you to know the truth about why i'm running. i'm running because i have lived through some of the same hardships many of you are facing. i'm running to be your voice, the voice of the working moms, stay at home moms, families, and small business owners who are struggling. >> rich, will that work in elite connecticut? >> that is actually a clone, sort of a merge between meg whitman and christine o'donnell. she's you. >> i love it. you can tell who's losing. thank you. the new book "the death of conservative conservativism" now in paperback. when we return let me finish with some of the things i've
been watching before the final davis the mid term elections. it blocks pain signals fast for relief precisely where you need it most. precise. only from the makers of tylenol. on our car insurance. great! at progressive, you can compare rates side by side, so you get the same coverage, often for less. wow! that is huge! [ disco playing ] and this is to remind you that you could save hundreds!
let me finish tonight with the election coming up next week. i'll be talking in coming days about what is at stake. right now i want to talk about the outlook. it looks right now like the democrats will lose the house. i say that because even in a decent year they would lose perhaps 25 seats. even if the jobless rate were down around 7%, not up around 10. even if president obama's numbers were up around mid 50s they would lose 25 seats. why? for the simple reason the democrats rolled up the score
the last two elections. if you look at the swing seats in 2006 and 2008 you can see places in suburbs and rural areas where republicans usually have the edge. they won the seats when people wanted to see a shift from bush to obama. those seats would revert back to their usual part partisan moorings even in normal times and 10% unemployment and holding is not a normal time. on the senate side it is a fact the democrats could lose that too. i look at the races in arkansas, indiana, wisconsin, north dakota, and see not too difficult pickups for the republicans. i look at nevada, illinois, pennsylvania and see the prospect for more wins by the republicans, somewhat more difficult. then i look at west virginia, the state of washington, california, colorado, and connecticut. and i see the republicans have a chance to win the whole senate. they have to win ten of those 12 but they can do it. the simple fact is the tide is heading in a republican direction but there will be exceptions where good people buck the tide. i've seen it happen and i've seen those people go on to buck the tide and lead impressive